Love Mitt's options, either cut military spending to help Social Needs or
just go for it and spend spend spend on a military that does not have to account
for its budget until 2017! Yes, that is correct, the Pentagon has until 2017 to
put accounting software in place to track its spending. There is over 10
trillion unaccounted for since 1991. And we just keep throwing money at them
year after year and hope that they are making good decisions! We already spend
more than the next 20 countries combined! Maybe I can buy a surplus tank that
doubles as a waffle maker?

LDS LiberalFarmington, UT

May 31, 2012 3:00 p.m.

@Riverton CougarRiverton, UTLDS Liberal,

So you see no
difference? Maybe you should spend a week in a Nazi concentration camp before
you compare Bush's "aggression" to Hitler's. And shame on the
person who liked your comment! For everyone's sake, please educate yourself
about the war before posting!•11:00 a.m. May 31, 2012

And as for “educating
myself about war” --- I don’t need to read about it, I’ve
LIVED it --- because I’m a VETERAN, it are you?

We have sworn
and oath to DEFEND this country and our Constitution.Never to OFFEND.

FYI – Offensive wars led to the ultimate down-fall of the Ancient
Nephites, not sexual immorality – but offensive bloodshed.

The
First Presidency of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints wrote that
“…we do not believe that aggression should be carried on in the name
and under the false cloak of defense.”

To answer you again, I
see NO difference.

utecougarSalt Lake City, UT

May 31, 2012 1:51 p.m.

Hey, Riverton, the Lamanites wiped out the Nephites anyway. Sorry for the
spoiler in case you haven't finished reading the Book of Mormon. And read
President Kimball's Bicentennial speech. Someone in these comments has
quoted some excerpts. Violence in self defense is justifiable (see the D&C),
but it's not what God would prefer us to choose. Violent acts such as
attacking a foreign country without provocation are never justifiable.

Happy Valley HereticOrem, UT

May 31, 2012 1:32 p.m.

Riverton Cougar said: I hope you realize that realistically, had all the
Nephites taken the oath the people of Ammon did and refused to defend
themselves, the Nephite nation would have been wiped out by the Lamanites.

I'm sorry but isn't that what ended up happening anyway?
Perhaps it was because they thought they new better, too.

I see no
differnce between Bush's act of agression, and the Crusades, Indian Wars or
Pirates.The Shame lies with those who believe in "pre-emptive
strikes" or attacking a nation without provocation.

Riverton CougarRiverton, UT

May 31, 2012 11:00 a.m.

"When is the last time Brother Mitt read the Book of Mormon? Has he ever
heard of the people of Ammon? You know--the Anti-Nephi-Lehis? The ones who
buried their weapons and relied entirely on God to preserve them. Does he take
his scriptures seriously? Just wondering."

utecougar,

Have you heard about the sons of the Anti-Nephi-Lehis? You know, those 2000
stripling warriors? Have you heard about Captain Moroni? Teancum? I hope you
realize that realistically, had all the Nephites taken the oath the people of
Ammon did and refused to defend themselves, the Nephite nation would have been
wiped out by the Lamanites. Their oath was very honorable, but that path
isn't always an option for everyone.

"I see no differnce
between Bush's act of agression, to the Vikings, Pirates or the Nazi who
invaded, plundered, and stole whatever they wanted from other countries."

LDS Liberal,

So you see no difference? Maybe you should
spend a week in a Nazi concentration camp before you compare Bush's
"aggression" to Hitler's. And shame on the person who liked your
comment! For everyone's sake, please educate yourself about the war before
posting!

utecougarSalt Lake City, UT

May 31, 2012 9:59 a.m.

When is the last time Brother Mitt read the Book of Mormon? Has he ever heard of
the people of Ammon? You know--the Anti-Nephi-Lehis? The ones who buried their
weapons and relied entirely on God to preserve them. Does he take his scriptures
seriously? Just wondering.

don17Temecula, CA

May 30, 2012 3:02 p.m.

CHS 85: I wrote out a response here a few times and decided to reword it. First,
again I am sorry you lost a year with your child. But, at least you still have
yours! How about your nephews and your father are they with you still or your
grandfather or a hand full of uncles and a friend from childhood?

I
too prefer peace and your insinuation here I don't, is again, just a plain
wrong assumption! I never said we need more war, but your comments back to me
put up these strawmen arguements.

No where has Romney said he wants
to go to war! The thousands of Veterans at the memorial he attended realize
that! You and the others here that read the article by AP got the AP slant!They emphasized 1 sentence in a 20 minute speech.

Sometimes
situations are not so simple as your last sentence states. War should be the
last resort. But a weak America is not good for anyone here or abroad!

American lives are priceless! ALL Americans!

Weakness in economic
power in America now causes tens of millions of Americans to suffer, adult and
children alike! Here Obama Failed!

I'd
rather serve under Pres. Obama, than leave my family 4-5 times for nothing under
Bush or Romney anyday my friends.

Punish those responsible for the
acts they committed, Not invading and occupying an entire country that
just-so-happens to be sitting on top of a very valuable natural resource.

I see no differnce between Bush's act of agression, to the Vikings,
Pirates or the Nazi who invaded, plundered, and stole whatever they wanted from
other countries.

CHS 85Sandy, UT

May 30, 2012 12:29 p.m.

@Don17

Let me ask you again since you failed to answer my question.
How much are the lives the men and women who died to bring civil chaos to Iraq
worth? How much were the lives of the tens of thousands of men who died in
Vietnam worth?

I have seen war, and I prefer peace. I have seen
men die in unimaginable, horrific ways. I almost drove over a Pepsi can in Iraq
and am still haunted by it. Nothing you can say here will convince me that we
need more war, more death, more killing without a clear threat to this country.
To me it is that simple.

Billy BobSalt Lake City, UT

May 30, 2012 11:45 a.m.

It is wise to keep the military strong. Anyone who thinks differently is
deceiving themselves. Now whether we should be as militarily active abroad as we
have in the past is an entirely different matter and I think is subject to
debate. I think sometimes doing so helps protect us, other times it just costs a
lot of money for nothing.

On a side note, isn't it great how
Obama prides himself on getting the troops out of Iraq... but fails to note that
he did so on W's time table? He places all the blame on Bush for anything
that is wrong (even things that have become worse under Obama) but fails to give
credit where credit is due (this includes Osama being taken out).

Anti Bush-ObamaWashington, DC

May 30, 2012 11:27 a.m.

To police the world right mitt? What a sad thing.

LDS LiberalFarmington, UT

May 30, 2012 10:44 a.m.

MountanmanHayden, ID@ Willary. Obviously you have never served in
the military or you would know that we liberate people from dictators and leave
them to govern themselves! Even in Libya , Japan, most of Europe, Iraq,
Afghanistan, Philippines, and many others!

2:06 p.m. May 29, 2012

==================

Obviously YOU've never served in the
military or else you'd know the we liberated them all right, and STILL
permanently occupy them with a full-blown military presence 70 years later.

So much for letting them govern themselves.

They can do
anything they want, so long as Uncle Sam appoves --- and he''s
atationed Big Brother there to keep a close eye on them.

don17Temecula, CA

May 30, 2012 10:22 a.m.

To CHS 85: If you were fair in your analysis of policy and the debate we're
having here you would think a bit before you claim I do not understand your
efforts or that I have no skin in the game! You don't know me! Two
questions you should ask yourself before you attack me based on your INCORRECT
assumptions are these:1. Why was he at a Memorial Service?2. Does he
have skin in the game?

I understand your sacrifice! More than you can
or might want to imagine. I appreciate with all my heart your sacrifice and that
of your family.

You may not agree with the intellegence that came
about that led us into Iraq, Afganistan, Somolia, Kuwait, Yemen, the
Philippines, Pakistan or any number of other Nations where the War on Terror has
been fought but you do not represent all the military. You represent you. It
stands now that by a very very large margin Veterans support Mr. Romney!

The Economy is the power of us as a collective people and that President
Obama has fsiled at!

23,500,000 Unemployed46,600,000 on food
stampsect....

CHS 85Sandy, UT

May 29, 2012 10:20 p.m.

@Don17

And what is his predecessor's legacy? 4000 dead American
men and women fighting endless wars based on "faulty" intelligence.

How much are their lives worth? How much was the year of my
daughter's life worth while I was fighting in Iraq on "faulty"
intelligence?

Just trivial to you people who have no skin in the
game.

don17Temecula, CA

May 29, 2012 5:08 p.m.

It really is too bad none of you who are hateing on Mitt Romney and that which
was written here didn't actually hear his presentation at the Memorial
Service. You just sucked down the left wing propaganda the media wanted you to
absorb! They wrote it and you swallowed it up. The article emphasized what the
left wanted not actually what occurred or was said. You have done the same thing
you accuse Republicans of. Listening to a Limbaugh or Hannity you say makes a
Republican a drone or worse, but here you have done the same! Yes, those of you
who swallow the Maddow, Schultz, Blitzer drivel, are just as bad as the
Republicans who absorb theirs with no critical thinking! Many comments by those
who do not like Mitt Romney are misquoted or just plain false in regards to his
speech. But a left leaning reporter twisted it, you accepted it and ran with it!

In the end it is the economy. People at the event realize that. 46.6
million on food stamps, 15.9 percent real unemployment, 15,723,000,000,000.00 in
debt and a 1.4 billion dollar budget shortfall! Obama's legacy

louieCottonwood Heights, UT

May 29, 2012 4:57 p.m.

@Mountanman If Obama is the failed icon of socialism, give me more of it. The
stock market has done better under the Obama and Clinton administrations than
any republican president including Reagan.

KDSalt Lake City, UT

May 29, 2012 3:43 p.m.

I tend to go with the opinions of those actually in the military. The majority
support Romney which should tell you how they feel about the current commander
in chief. Secondly, the military is the least of my worries with a deficit that
continues to grow by 2 million dollars per minute. Before too long China will
own our military and the point will be mute. Mitt is rich because he knows how
to manage money. Obama knows nothing about running a military or budget. I
won't say that I disagree with Obama on everything, but his ability to
spend money is unprecedented.

IdahoStrangerNEWDALE, ID

May 29, 2012 3:39 p.m.

"Romney said Obama 'can no longer ignore calls from congressional
leaders in both parties to take more assertive steps in Syria." Romney said
the current approach has only given Syrian leaders more time to crackdown on
protesters.' "

War, War, War! That is his foreign policy?

Let all of those who are in favor of getting US involved in yet
another no-win war, be the first to volunteer. If we can now allow women to
serve in combat, we can surely allow our politicians to serve in the front lines
too. Let them lead the charge and then we will see how many more wars they want
to involve us in.

"calls from congressional leaders in both
parties..." The congressional leaders in both parties are a large part of
the problem. Yet, they won't even assert the power given them in the
Constitution to actually "declare war", giving in instead to UN
Resolutions. Leaders?

But what about the invasion that is still
ongoing right here in the US? Where are our troops to defend our own borders?

What good is it to have the strongest military in the world if it is
not used to defend US?

IdahoStrangerNEWDALE, ID

May 29, 2012 2:25 p.m.

Romney said: "The other is to commit to preserve America as the strongest
military in the world, second to none, with no comparable power anywhere in the
world."

From: Freedom From War: The United States Programfor General and Complete Disarmament in a Peaceful World. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
PUBLICATION 7277Disarmament Series 5, Released September 1961:

"progressive controlled disarmament and continuously developing principles
and procedures of international law would proceed to a point where no state
would have the military power to challenge the progressively strengthened U.N.
Peace Force ... "

Since the US still belongs to and supports the
UN, are we to believe that Romney is prepared to end our membership in the UN
and stop contributing our US Armed Forces to the UN Peace Force?

See
how truthful Romney's pledge is by seeing Romney campaign to end our
membership in the UNand stop having our soldiers wearing UN blue and
fighting UN wars.

Google "Freedom From War 7277" and
"Changing Commands: The Betrayal of America's Military" to see the
truth about what is happening.

MountanmanHayden, ID

May 29, 2012 2:06 p.m.

@ Willary. Obviously you have never served in the military or you would know
that we liberate people from dictators and leave them to govern themselves! Even
in Libya , Japan, most of Europe, Iraq, Afghanistan, Philippines, and many
others!

UtahVoterSpanish Fork, UT

May 29, 2012 1:10 p.m.

I simply do not see the "clear differences" between President Obama and
the potential President Romney on foreign policy. The two haggle over tiny
differences in how much exactly we should grow our overgrown spending. Both
propose massive spending increases on unnecessary wars overseas. Both propose
general spending that far outstrips our current taxation by more than a 1/3.
I'd love to believe that Romney intends to cut more spending but his
proposed budgets call for near status-quo.

Mitt Romney was calling
for general war with Syria yesterday? Does Romney know any Syrians? Are any of
his sons in the military? I've been to Syria and have a great love for the
people there and my prayers are with them -- but I don't currently see how
a general attack by our defense forces is likely to turn out good for the
people. Basshar al-Assad is indubitably a tyrant, though not yet with as much
blood on his hands as his father before him -- and yet, again, after seeing the
hundreds of *thousands* killed by our destruction and overthrow and occupation
of Afghanistan and Iraq, I wouldn't wish that upon the Syrian people.

Craig ClarkBoulder, CO

May 29, 2012 1:07 p.m.

Romney pledges to keep our military the strongest in the world. That's
essential but insufficient for a foreign policy.

Riverton CougarRiverton, UT

May 29, 2012 11:25 a.m.

You gotta love the liberal logic.

Liberals whine about how 9/11
happened on Bush's watch. Then they complain when Romney calls for
increased defense.

Liberals hate Bush for increasing the national
debt. Then it's ok when Obama adds more than Bush did, and did it in less
than half the time.

Liberals claim that Romney is a flip-flopper, but
embrace Obama's broken campaign promises of transparency and letting the
public have 5 days to read through a bill before he signs is, among many other
lies (such as a one-term proposition if the economy is still down).

Liberals blame Bush for our unemployment still being high, yet claim that
Obama is adding millions of private sector jobs (why is unemployment still high,
then?).

According to liberals, Romney can't be trusted to do
what he says. Then they say that what he says he will do will destroy our
country. So... using that logic, Romney can't be expected to destroy our
country, or else he's the kind of guy who does what he says he will do. In
that case, liberals, you have nothing to fear! Unless you're lying about
something.

LDS LiberalFarmington, UT

May 29, 2012 10:49 a.m.

Echoing der Führer and the need for a growing military $ -- Mitt Romney
says, "A strong America is the best deterrent to war that has ever
been invented," he said.

Funny - Bet you never thought middle
eastern terrorists throwing rocks and hiding in caves in Pakistan needed a $1.5
Billion Stealth bomber, or a 10 year $2 Trillion occupation of their country to
take them out.

BTW - Jesus taught, Those who live by the sword,
shall die by the sword. “Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy
sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the
sword” (Matthew 26:52, King James Version)

EsquireSpringville, UT

May 29, 2012 10:34 a.m.

Yawn. More blather from Romney, saying nice things and backing it up with
nothing. What would he do differently than Obama. No one in their right mind
or who is honest would say Obama has weakened the military. It only means going
back to the neo-con era of Bush and invading whomever and whenever they like
with no regard for the cost to U.S. taxpayers and the ruined lives of the
members of the military. If Romney would say, we need to streamline the
military and look to get more for our investment, I'll listen. Until then,
his comments are more of the same old tired cliches from Republican campaigns
from the last 30 plus years. Why does his provide no real details or plans?
Could it be he is an empty suit?

JWBKaysville, UT

May 29, 2012 10:24 a.m.

When an article, from the AP or DesNews appears in the paper that supports, sort
of the military and tangle it with politics, how many new people surface to say
the military should be cut back due to politics, not military strategy.
Presidents over the past more than 20 years have used politics to use the
military for whatever they needed to show their might and policy, not what is
best for the country. The military have plans and Presidents disclose those
plans for their political gain. The Commander-in-Chief is an important position
but is used to get home court advantage and not for our national defense. We
have so much good for the world. We are not an empire building nation as some
suggest but are providing for the common defense. We cannot let Europe's
lack of military be the model to emulate. We have our Founding Fathers and
Constitution to use as a basis. Loss of lives is not what we want for political
basis but for military plan purposes approved by the Executive and Congressional
balance of valid policy and funds. On Memorial Day we celebrate those who gave
their all for our Country.

one old manOgden, UT

May 29, 2012 9:53 a.m.

I've tried several times this morning to ask a simple question, but the DN
censors apparently don't like it. Here goes again:

When Mitt
launches the next war, will his children be fighting in it?

Or will
it be the children of less affluent Americans who will do the dying again?

Irony GuyBountiful, Utah

May 29, 2012 9:48 a.m.

Vote Romney for the next big exciting war! It will enrich his mega-rich buddies
under the guise of enthusiastic flag waving. What we really need is a
moderating, diplomatic voice looking for common ground and rational solutions.
(That would be Obama, thank you.)

embarrassed Utahn!Salt Lake City, UT

May 29, 2012 9:43 a.m.

Know what's funny? The Des News moderator will not publish comments made
by LDS church leaders about war.

Seems to me they want to do all
they can to deflect any negativity relating to the favored son, Mitt and his
warlike attitude.

Cements my opinion of the objectivity of the
Deseret News.

embarrassed Utahn!Salt Lake City, UT

May 29, 2012 9:38 a.m.

"We are a warlike people, easily distracted from our assignment of preparing
for the coming of the Lord. When enemies rise up, we commit vast resources to
the fabrication of gods of stone and steel … and depend on them for
protection and deliverance. When threatened, we become anti-enemy instead of
pro-kingdom of God; we train a man in the art of war and call him a patriot,
thus, in the manner of Satan’s counterfeit of true patriotism, perverting
the Savior’s teaching: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse
you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use
you, and persecute you;”(Matthew 5:44-45) … What are we to fear when
the Lord is with us? … Our assignment is affirmative: … to carry the
gospel to our enemies, that they might no longer be our enemies."

Prophet Spencer W. Kimball

What conundrum???? There is no question
that Barack Obama has the foreign policy credentials, relationships and
experience to lead our Nation back to a legitimate world power. Vote Obama, not
for the sabre-rattler!

DEWSandy, UT

May 29, 2012 8:55 a.m.

Military should still stay strong but need to reduce those bloating working
people in the federal government who have never have been in the military!

williaryKearns, UT

May 29, 2012 8:41 a.m.

@Mountanman

So your solution to terrorism is to invade, destroy,
police and create a new US empire in every country that Al-Qaida exists in?

Revenge was swift for 9/11, the Taliban was defeated, Afgahnistan
invaded, yet a STILL on-going war effort after a decade. It will likely never
end completely.

And it's been proven time and time again that
Iraq and Al-Qaida while sharing a central hatred of America, were not in league
together. Just another Iraq war myth created by the war-hype machine of the
Republican party.

Scream 9/11 and it becomes an excuse for anything.
Like spending TRILLIONS on wars that would never see and end if Republicans had
their way.

RapunzelthebraveHELOTES, TX

May 29, 2012 8:21 a.m.

Mountain man states, "Obama is the new icon of failed socialism!"

Unfortunately, Romney has and will continue to emulate much of the
failed socialism Obama represents and promotes. In any debate Obama can crush
Romney by simply pointing out that he has used Romney as a policy-making roll
model.

RapunzelthebraveHELOTES, TX

May 29, 2012 8:19 a.m.

Mitt Romney has already agreed with Obama's NDAA bill that effectively
destroys our Bill of Rights. Mitt Romney is now promising to expand our
continued empire building - just as Obama will continue to do. The truth is
there isn't much difference between Obama and Romney. We have a growing
dictatorship on our hands. And, putting Romney into office might give us a
benign dictator, however, I prefer liberty over a dictatorship of any form.
People aren't voting for a president when their only choices are Obama and
Romney - they are voting for a king. Only one presidential candidate has
offered true liberty this campaign season - and he has been subject to a very
exact and pervasive black-out by the dictatorship-promoting media.

MountanmanHayden, ID

May 29, 2012 8:13 a.m.

@ Willary. Have you ever heard of Al Qaida? You know, those thugs who flew those
airplanes into our buildings and murdered 3,000 innocent people on 9/11? How
quickly you forget!

MountanmanHayden, ID

May 29, 2012 7:48 a.m.

Obama is the new icon of failed socialism!

AggieloveCache county, USA

May 29, 2012 7:46 a.m.

Would you rather be protected, or invaded?

williaryKearns, UT

May 29, 2012 7:27 a.m.

Just curious but can someone ask Mitt how much the two "social programs"
called Afgahnistan and Iraq cost us American taxpayers?

Once again,
Mitt pledging to do nothing new, but instead returning us to the failed W.
policies.

peterAlpine, UT

May 29, 2012 7:01 a.m.

And what in Obama's nonspeculative track record can you say is
"good?"

Baron ScarpiaLogan, UT

May 29, 2012 6:31 a.m.

Leveraging the military for the campaign is probably not a good move on
Mitt's part.

His deferments over his LDS mission and schooling
(at Harvard) only highlight issues that are problematic among Evangelicals and
conservatives. Mitt pokes fun at Obama's Harvard education, when Mitt
himself has TWO degrees from the liberal institution.

Mitt is
weakest on military and foreign policy issues (e.g., comments about Russian
being our enemy is another recent gaffe). In the debates, Obama will crush him
on foreign policy. Mitt needs a strong foreign policy VP -- Huntsman comes to
mind (his LDS background would be a tough sell), but I've read that Condie
Rice is also being considered. Rice would harken back to the Bush years that
would be a turn off for most voters, but the GOP doesn't have many strong
or well-recognized foreign policy/military types in its ranks for a good VP
slot.

Furry1993Clearfield, UT

May 29, 2012 6:18 a.m.

How many more of the country's brightest and best is Mitt willing to
sacrifice? We REALLLY don't need this guy.

Joshua SteimleDraper, UT

May 29, 2012 5:50 a.m.

Seems like a funny statement to make. Mitt makes it sound as though the US is in
danger of being overtaken by some other country, when in reality we could cut
our military spending by 50% and still easily spend more than any other country.
The US currently spends more on militarism than the rest of the world
combined.

Not that military spending = strong military. We could
double military spending and still have the weakest military in the world.
Unfortunately, I believe Mitt does equate spending to strength, and military
spending with defense. If we wanted a stronger defense, we would actually cut
military spending drastically. Our current system is so bloated and inefficient,
not to mention that our military strategy is focused on empire which promotes
negative feelings against the US, that each additional dollar almost guarantees
that we become less safe rather than more so. The better strategy would be to
bring all the troops home, end the empire building, and focus on a real system
of self-defense.

HeffyKaysville, UT

May 29, 2012 2:03 a.m.

The military could be cut in half and still be the strongest in the world by a
good margin. It doesn't need to be grown.

mightymiteDRAPER, UT

May 28, 2012 10:55 p.m.

He says this now, wait and see what he does... Look at his track record... Not
good..

Mark BEureka, CA

May 28, 2012 6:45 p.m.

Let's see. Pump the military (again), cut taxes for the richest Americans
(again), take a longing gaze at another preemptive attack, and make sure
we're keeping the Israelis happy. On whose back will the budget then be
balanced?

ModerateSalt Lake City, UT

May 28, 2012 6:23 p.m.

Still fighting the Russians, eh Mitt?

The_KaiserHolladay, UT

May 28, 2012 5:30 p.m.

When will a political candidate stand up and call out the fact that we cannot
stop spending? Military spending is out of control.

Protect our
borders. Speak softly, carry a big stick. Too bad these days we are trying to
use a tree instead of a big stick.

don17Temecula, CA

May 28, 2012 5:02 p.m.

Another AP article trying to promote a failed President by down playing the
Veterans Memorial Service in San Diego. When Romney rose to speak he wasn't
looking at a crowd of just 5,000. The overflow was 5,000 individals strong. All
the parking lots were filled at the complex and adjoining complexes to capacity
and buses ran full. It took an hour to empty the lots out! Pastor
Ottolango(Vietnam Veterans of America) gave a powerful invocation followed by a
stirring speech of Thank You by Kim Dang Trang(Vietnamese Community
Association). That was followed by David Dickey(San Diego Veteran of the Year)
and Carl DeMaio(San Diego City Council). Nick Popaditch gave a
historical perspective to the event with detailed Battle Stories that brought
many to tears and also to flag waving applause! Then John McCain rose to speak
and was drowned out in appreciative cheers. He put the protestors in their place
and enthusiastically endorsed and introduced Mitt Romney! Mitt Romney
looked over 20-25,000 people and promoted American Idealism a strong Military
and a Can Do Spirit missing in America! Love of Country was a powerful theme!
Mitt's speech received many ovations!